DOT Archives - Transportation For America

Four ways states and the Biden administration can curb transportation pollution

Traffic Backup on I-95 North at the Intersection with the Downtown Expressway in Richmond

Last month, the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) proposed a new rule that will require states to measure and set goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with highways. This is a critical tool to foster accountability and steer infrastructure investments toward better climate outcomes. It’s essential for the USDOT to finalize this rule and for states to lead the way in realizing its full potential.

This post was written in partnership with Evergreen Action.

The Greenhouse Gas Emissions Measure (GGEM), would require state DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to measure and reduce greenhouse gas emissions tied to highways on the National Highway System (i.e. Interstates and US Routes). This proposal is a key action that Evergreen, Transportation for America, and other advocates have called for. Because the transportation sector emits more greenhouse gas pollution than any other sector of the American economy, data collected from this measure will be a vital tool to support investments in alternative transportation modes, better protect disadvantaged communities, and advance President Biden’s climate goals.

Following the enactment of the critical climate and infrastructure investments contained in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Infrastructure Investment & Jobs Act (IIJA), Congress and the Biden administration must each play a role in ensuring that these resources are implemented effectively and equitably. At the same time, increased ambition at the state level and bold executive action are essential in order to attain further emissions reductions. New federal rules that enable states to push the envelope are needed to tackle the largest sources of climate pollution, and that includes our transportation sector.

So what is this rule all about?

In 2012 Congress passed the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), a two-year transportation authorization bill following nearly 3 years of stop-gap extensions. MAP-21 represented a tentative step towards accountability for the billions of dollars the federal government allocates to states every year for transportation, by codifying seven different performance categories for federal highway programs. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) created performance measures and subsequently required state DOTs to set performance targets aligned with these goals.

In 2017, the Obama administration proposed requiring states to measure greenhouse gas pollution from their surface transportation systems (i.e. roads, highways, transit, etc) for the first time, consistent with the goal of environmental sustainability established by MAP-21. Many construction industry stakeholders opposed it, likely viewing it as a threat to business as usual. Unsurprisingly, the Trump administration sided with industry and repealed the measure before it was fully implemented.

But a new and improved version of this measure is back, under the Biden administration. In early July, the FHWA proposed a new draft rule for a GGEM that would establish a method for state DOTs to calculate greenhouse gas emissions. Rather than a one-size-fits-all target set by the USDOT, states would be permitted to set their own unique declining targets that collectively lead the US towards net-zero emissions by 2050. Critically, the draft GGEM rule would require these targets to continuously decrease, to cut emissions over time in each state. The proposal is a big step forward from the status quo, but still limited in scope. For example, states face no penalties for failing to meet their established targets.

Here are the four actions the Biden administration and state DOTs must take for this proposal to be successful:

1. The Biden administration must finalize a strong performance measure rule ASAP

While the IIJA is not a transformative climate bill, states have a wide berth in deciding how to allocate formula funding under IIJA. The law also establishes new categories of climate mitigation funding, like the Carbon Reduction Program, and expands the kinds of investments eligible under legacy programs like the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program. In short, governors and state governments will determine, through the decisions they make about what to build, whether or not the IIJA leads to reductions in climate pollution. However, without the proposed rule, the public has no way to hold states accountable for reducing emissions with the windfall of infrastructure money from the IIJA.

Right now, the FHWA has opened a public comment period for the proposed rule through October 13, 2022. Just like in 2017, this rule is already meeting fierce resistance, from both industry and Senate Republicans.

Some stakeholders are falsely claiming that this proposed rulemaking is outside the scope of the performance measures set forth by Congress in MAP-21. Many congressional leaders who were involved in passing that legislation have set the record straight, emphasizing that this proposal will “fulfill the original congressional intent…” There is plenty of flexibility for states built into the existing rule and the Biden administration must finalize a strong performance measure.

2. The Biden administration should factor in state performance when evaluating other competitive grant programs, and FHWA should improve its performance dashboard

Although most federal transportation funding is formula-based, the USDOT can influence policy significantly through discretionary funds like the Secretary’s RAISE grants or the Reconnecting Communities Program. To ensure the greenhouse gas performance measure doesn’t just “sit on the shelf,” the department should assess the relative ambitions of state greenhouse gas reduction targets and progress states achieve as it awards competitive funds. The Biden administration should also incorporate implementation of the measure into criteria for new programs created by the Inflation Reduction Act, including the Neighborhood Access and Equity grant program and the EPA’s new Climate Pollution Reduction grants.

Moreover, because of the non-binding nature of the performance measure proposed, it’s essential that the emissions data and targets of each state are properly advertised and disseminated. This will allow the data to facilitate increased accountability. Right now, the FHWA’s dashboard for state performance data is buried on its website and the information is not frequently discussed or publicized. Going forward, the FHWA and the Office of the Secretary should reinvigorate the dashboard and regularly update stakeholders and the broader public regarding the progress states are making in setting and reaching their declining targets.

3. States should incorporate performance measures in state policy and go beyond USDOT’s proposal

*Washington State’s Move Ahead Washington program invests in public transportation and other sustainable travel options. Flickr photo by SounderBruce*

Because the targets required by the draft GGEM would be non-binding, it will ultimately be up to states to make their greenhouse gas targets meaningful in a local context. Going forward, states must better prioritize climate in transportation policy and funding decisions. Many states are already measuring greenhouse gas pollution in the transportation sector in some capacity and tailoring their long-range plans, short-term capital plans, and overall investment strategies accordingly. The following model policies should be considered as states move forward with accessing IIJA/IRA funding and implementing the performance measure.

Colorado: The Colorado Transportation Commission recently approved a new rule that will set mandatory greenhouse gas reduction goals for each MPO. These goals must be incorporated into investments identified in each region’s short and long-term transportation plans. The regional goals can be achieved by reprioritizing planned projects or investing in new mitigation strategies. In most cases, this will mean shifting investments away from the construction and expansion of highways and towards public transit and improvements to pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.

Minnesota: Even as demand for electric vehicles has grown and the Biden administration acts to raise fuel efficiency standards for cars, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the United States continue to increase. States have a tremendous opportunity to act where the federal government has not and institute policies that tackle auto dependency. Minnesota recently adopted a statewide goal to reduce VMT statewide by 20 percent by 2050. More states need to look beyond electric vehicles and work towards shifting travel towards the most sustainable and equitable modes of transportation.

Washington: Washington State DOT is not waiting for the federal government and has already implemented a performance measure for greenhouse gas pollution associated with the National Highway System infrastructure inside the state. Emissions and targets are reported to the federal government biennially. Earlier this year, Washington also enacted Move Ahead Washington, a significant transportation funding package that invests heavily in public transportation and other sustainable modes aimed at reducing car travel.

4. States should implement an equity-first approach to meeting targets

States will have significant discretion when deciding how and where to spend transportation-related IIJA funds, and they should ensure they deploy federal funds with a focus on communities that are already impacted by transportation planning and pollution. Black, Brown, Indigenous, and low-income communities suffer the most from vehicle pollution and are historically least likely to receive government investments. By prioritizing these underserved and overburdened communities, states can ensure they are supporting their most vulnerable populations while reducing pollution.

Additionally, state policymakers need to pay careful attention to wealth disparities between white users of the transportation system and people of color, which impact both mode choice and job access. States should consider new incentives for used electric vehicles to supplement the credit for used vehicles contained in the Inflation Reduction Act, and also need to take significant steps to build out networks of Complete Streets and make public transportation more reliable and affordable. Finally, state departments of transportation should prioritize investments that begin repairing past racist policy decisions that were meant to intentionally divide neighborhoods.

Key takeaway

The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas pollution in the United States. Because most transportation investment decisions are made at the state level, the USDOT’s new Greenhouse Gas Emissions Measure is a critical tool to foster accountability and steer infrastructure investments away from expanding highways and towards vehicle electrification, public transportation, and improvements for other sustainable modes of travel like biking and walking. It’s essential for the USDOT to finalize this rule and for states to lead the way in realizing its full potential.

Little-known university research centers could hold the key for transportation solutions

The infrastructure law sets aside funding for university transportation centers (UTCs) to research and provide actionable recommendations on emerging transportation issues. However, in the face of mounting climate resiliency, equity, safety, mobility access, and state of repair concerns, are UTCs poised to meet the moment?

*Map of university transportation centers under the prior infrastructure law, the FAST ACT (2017-2021). Image from USDOT.*

Tucked away in the IIJA funding is about $500 million, a drop in the bucket compared to the cash stream for infrastructure. This money funds UTCs, which are made up of universities and other institutions of higher learning that collaborate to propose research on a specific emerging transportation issue and find actionable solutions.

comic illustration — *States often follow Congress’s lead and devote the majority of their time and resources to more of the same.*

The research that UTCs produce is critically important to the transportation industry. Considering that states have received an unprecedented federal investment, they can either make transformational changes to improve safety, state of repair, and access to opportunities…or they can keep up the status quo strategies that propel economic, social, and health disparities.

State DOTs are under pressure to deliver on core services, leaving little room for thinking about innovation. Private sector consultants are under similar constraints because they have to focus on client deliverables and deadlines. With little time and resources to develop new ideas, these entities are best equipped to deliver more of the same—which is exactly what they tend to do.

UTCs don’t have the same pressure to deliver a core service to the public. In fact, the resource a UTC provides is innovation: they’re the implementation think tank that tests out applications, operations, materials, and approaches that can be readily used by transportation professionals. In addition, UTCs serve as a proving ground for future transportation professionals, educators, and businesses, allowing the ideas UTCs form to flow into the transportation industry through the people and businesses that helped develop them.

Here’s the challenge

Congress has identified key national priorities for the transportation system. Those goals are further translated into research priorities, which UTCs must choose from to compete for federal funding. In other words, UTCs obtain funding by focusing on one of these goals:

Improving mobility of people and goods
Reducing congestion
Promoting safety
Improving the durability and extending the life of transportation infrastructure
Preserving the environment
Preserving the existing transportation system
Reducing transportation cybersecurity risks

These are all valuable goals, but they also intersect. For example, the prevailing solution to congestion is highway widening projects, even though these projects often fail to improve mobility, increase the risk of traffic fatalities, add to the ever-growing number of lanes that require maintenance, and lead to more emissions. If an innovative UTC is looking for a new solution for congestion, they would benefit from the perspectives of UTCs focused on promoting safety, preserving the existing transportation system, improving the mobility of people and goods, and preserving the environment. This collaboration would allow them to find better solutions that don’t run the risk of repeating past mistakes.

Unfortunately, UTCs don’t work together in this way. Under the current approach, we could have a UTC in the Northwest focusing efforts on climate resiliency while a UTC in the South focuses on freight management. Then when it’s time to share their trailblazing research, state DOT politics come into play, meaning the findings might not penetrate equitably across the United States.

This approach creates inequities in perspectives and divides urgent transportation priorities that should overlap. It’s a great approach to help focus efforts for a project, but considering the role a UTC has in churning out future transportation professionals and the latest business venture, plus the inconsistent distribution of UTC research findings, this approach ultimately hinders innovation and leaves us entrenched in the broken status quo.

So how do we make a difference with UTCs?

The federal rules guiding UTCs can’t change at this point—the Notice of Funding Opportunity has already been released and the application process has started. However, as it does with all competitive grants, the USDOT has discretion in its review process. It will be crucial for the USDOT to nudge and encourage applicants to think holistically about their target goal by also considering other intersecting national priorities. This will make it easier for state DOTs to share research, and it will enable emerging transportation professionals across the country to gain more exposure to transportation issues and research development. The latter will be particularly important as the emerging professionals working for UTCs could one day join state DOTs and shape policy-making, operations, and implementation. The more they understand about today’s urgent transportation issues, the better.

How Can a State Department of Transportation Do Right by the Locals?

A key theme in a recent Washington State DOT conference was a recognition that the state DOT needs to do more to engage with local constituents and agencies and meet local needs, particularly in cities. Those cities are the engines of economic growth, and where the default approach of the past half-century — road widening to speed driving at the expense of other goals — did not, does not, and will not work.

A sizable crowd at the WSDOT Innovations & Partnerships in Transportation summit

I attended the conference on September 22, entitled Innovations & Partnerships in Transportation, which strived to train WSDOT staff and local agencies in Washington State on partnership and innovation.

With Secretary of Transportation Lynn Peterson at the helm since early 2013, WSDOT is one state DOT that is working hard to be more innovative and responsive to evolving transportation needs. T4A member Transportation Choices Coalition worked with T4A and Smart Growth America to organize a training for WSDOT leadership staff in Olympia in November, 2014 on performance-based planning. In some ways, the 2014 training helped seed interest in this most recent symposium of WSDOT and local agency staff from across the state.

Roger Millar, recently departed from SGA, is starting work as Deputy Secretary at WSDOT in October.

Many of the same speakers we brought in 2014 came back to discuss many of the same issues in this bigger forum. Jeffrey Tumlin of Nelson Nygard returned to speak about new approaches to practical design. SGA’s Roger Millar, also featured prominently in the 2014 workshop, was incidentally just hired as WSDOT’s Deputy Secretary starting in October.

State DOTs typically concern themselves with longer distance or inter-city travel, and not necessarily with the local needs that drive local economies, but this conference pointed to a different direction for WSDOT. Multiple speakers discussed the changes leading the agency to a more multimodal approach to transportation that does a better job of meeting the needs of cities and their residents. Households are shrinking, Millennials especially are driving less, buying fewer cars and getting their drivers licenses later if at all. More people are moving to downtowns and walkable neighborhoods, and companies are moving to these places to attract and retain talent.

The economy is shifting from an emphasis on ownership to an emphasis on sharing, experiences, and more efficient use of resources.

To illustrate the pace of change we could expect to see because of new mobility options like Lyft, Uber, bike share and autonomous cars, speaker Gabe Klein, a former director of both Chicago’s and D.C.’s DOT, asked the audience how many of them owned a smart phone 10 years ago. No one raised their hands — smartphones weren’t even available just ten short years ago, but today nearly every participant owned one. “That’s how fast change can take place.”

Several speakers, Jeffrey Tumlin in particular, talked openly about the problem of induced demand — the phenomenon where increased roadway capacity induces more driving resulting in a failure to solve congestion problems. This topic is not one typically broached at state DOT functions.

Can a state DOT re-orient toward the new realities of multi-modalism, urban economic development, and unknowns like autonomous vehicles? WSDOT, with Lynn Peterson at the helm, is one of the state DOTs that has a shot. In closing the conference, Lynn called on the several hundred of her staff in attendance to work through these issues in partnership with local agencies and constituencies.

DOT poised to move on a long-term transportation bill in 2011?

When President Obama made his announcement on Labor Day about investing in infrastructure, most media outlets focused in directly on the $50 billion amount that would be spent up front to jumpstart infrastructure investment — something we already noted last week. But he also talked about the need for a reformed long-term transportation reauthorization, the full six-year bill that would provide certainty for job creation and the economy.

Here’s a quote from the release that accompanied the President’s speech:

The President proposes to pair this with a long-term framework to reform and expand our nation’s investment in transportation infrastructure. Since the end of last year, when the last long-term surface transportation legislation expired, these investments have been continued on a temporary basis, even as the trust fund to finance them has fallen into insolvency. If we are to enjoy the benefits that come from a world-class transportation system, Congress must enact a long-term reauthorization that expands and reforms our infrastructure investments and returns the transportation trust fund to solvency.

So the million dollar question has been, when will we see this bill? With Congress unlikely to pass anything of substance between now and the election and an already full docket for the likely lame duck session to follow, what is the administration or USDOT saying about moving a bill forward?

As much progress as has been made by the House transportation committee thus far, introducing a full bill proposal all the way back in July of 2009, both chambers have been waiting for the White House to declare the transportation bill a priority and to put their significant weight behind it. Now it sounds like that day could be just a few months away.

In a meeting with advocates this week, Secretary LaHood said that they have the go-ahead from the White House to move a six year bill in 2011, with a full proposal accompanying the President’s budget request for FY12 in February, according to USDOT sources.

The question remains as to whether or not that will be a full bill, or merely the administration’s principles for a bill, but in either case, this is at least a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel for our long wait for a transformational transportation bill. Which, we remind you, expired one year ago in just a few days. (See the clock above on our web site.)

Dozens of bicyclists ride to USDOT Friday to tell Secretary LaHood “thanks”

Transportation for America was proud to co-author and circulate a letter thanking Secretary Ray LaHood for The U.S. Department of Transportation’s recent policy statement elevating walking and biking in national policy, “giving bicycles and pedestrians a seat at the transportation table,” as the Secretary put it on his blog this morning.

Last Friday, several of us at T4 took that appreciation a step further — or, several pedals further — by cycling with a handful of national partners, our local partners from the Washington Area Bicyclists Association, and about 50 local bicyclists to the DOT Headquarters across town to thank the Secretary in person.

The ride from Freedom Plaza at 14th and Pennsylvania in Northwest DC to the DOT building near the Southwest waterfront district took about 25 minutes. Most of the ride was taken on bike lanes, a number of which are relatively new, including new separated lanes right in the center of America’s main street, Pennsylvania Avenue.

Watch and share this video from Friday’s ride that we put together:

LaHood was on hand to receive our large bicycling posse, a group which collectively represented more than 200 organizations from every state in America. Lilly Shoup spoke on behalf of T4 America and was joined by Barbara McCann from the National Complete Streets Coalition, Margo Pedroso from the Safe Routes to School National Partnership and Randy Neufield of America Bikes, who joked to LaHood: “it’s not surprising that people who ride bikes like your new policy.”

The Washington Area Bicyclists Association, one of signatories on the letter and a local T4 partner, presented LaHood with a thank you poster signed by hundreds of DC-area bicyclists at Bike to Work Day.

Making our streets safer and more accessible for bicyclists and pedestrians of all ages and abilities is serious business to LaHood, a former Republican Congressman from Peoria, Illinois who cannot be accused of losing touch with mainstream Americans. LaHood goes home often and can be seen on weekends biking with his wife or grandchildren on converted rails-to-trails in both Illinois and Washington.

“You really do great honor to the people at DOT,” LaHood said, intentionally turning his back on the cameras for a few minutes to speak directly to the bicyclists gathered behind him. “What you have done is begin to change some attitudes on Capitol Hill.”

LaHood and to-be-named DC Bikeshare bike Originally uploaded by Transportation for America

The Secretary is right about that. Ohio Congressman Steve LaTourette, for instance, went from questioning whether LaHood’s policy statement on bicycle and pedestrian options was the product of drug use at USDOT to backpedaling with a pro-cycling message on his website actively endorsing the idea. LaTourette heard from his constituents, who liked the bike paths he bad been bringing back to the district over the years, and he listened.

Secretary LaHood was clear about that point: this change in policy is a reflection of what Americans are demanding, a theme which he returned to time and time again in his remarks.

The Secretary also knows, as do many of our partners, that we won’t make lasting progress on increasing walking and biking options without a comprehensive, forward-thinking reauthorization of our surface transportation law. In this crucial six-year bill, we can put real resources into projects that get kids walking to school safely, families biking together on the weekends, short trips being made by foot or bike, and everyone able to live a more active and healthy life.

LaHood was very gracious, saying this morning that our visit was a “great way to start the summer,” and we couldn’t agree more.

Secretary LaHood on T4 America’s poll: “People want better options”

Secretary LaHood at our petition delivery last November

We got some superb media coverage last week on the release of our national poll and there’s an engaging discussion underway today on the National Journal experts blog, but we wanted to especially highlight a terrific post today from Ray LaHood, U.S. Secretary of Transportation, on his official DOT blog.

While LaHood was showered with gratitude from many for his statement at the National Bike Summit that bicyclists and pedestrians should be accommodated in our transportation network and no longer treated as second-class citizens, he also took a verbal lashing from some defenders of the transportation status quo — but not the pulse of the American people, as our poll clearly shows.

While having the concrete numbers from a bipartisan national survey is encouraging and helpful, Secretary LaHood says that most notably, our poll echoes the same drumbeat he’s heard all around the country from people in big cities, small towns and all the places in between during his first 14 months in office.

This is precisely what I’ve been talking about here in this blog with regard to livability, transit, and walking and biking. I have traveled all over this country in the past 14 months, and everywhere I go people want better options. Options that offer reduced greenhouse-gas emissions. Options that offer reduced fuel-consumption. Options that offer better health. Options that bring communities together.

Now, let me make this absolutely clear: I never said we would stop repairing, maintaining, and–yes–even expanding roadways. I said only that it’s time to stop assuming that putting more cars on more roads is the best way to move people around more effectively.

This survey demonstrates that, by and large, the American people get that. I never doubted them, but it sure is nice to see the numbers.

So, thank you, Transportation For America, for that 82%-strong vote of confidence.

The pleasure is all ours, Secretary.

Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move campaign a positive step, but must emphasize transportation voices

In February, First Lady Michelle Obama announced her exciting “Let’s Move” campaign and the goal of seriously confronting childhood obesity in the United States within a generation. Now, the campaign – more formally known as the Presidential Task Force on Childhood Obesity – is getting to work on an action plan to influence federal policy.

This is a great start, but there’s an omission: the task force has not emphasized the potential role for the U.S. Department of Transportation. The link between physical activity and the built environment is well established – transportation practices strongly influence physical activity and health outcomes for Americans of all ages.

An active living approach to physical activity incorporates walking and bicycling into everyday activities. Forty years ago, more than half of children walked and bicycled to school, contributing to exercise and good health. Today, less than 15 percent of children walk or bike school, with the rest ferried by school buses or car. Children who have access to safe, convenient and ample walking and bicycling opportunities in their community develop active transportation habits that can last a lifetime.

Michelle Obama has been a positive role model for children and a leader in promoting healthy habits. Let’s make sure the influence of transportation and the built environment are a part of the Let’s Move effort. More walking and biking = healthier kids.

You can see Transportation for America’s comments on the First Lady’s task force here.

Transit grants out the federal door, but what about the cuts?

Park and Ride Ribbon Cutting Originally uploaded by WSDOT

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood is (rightfully) touting the great news on his blog this morning that the Federal Transit Administration met their ambitious deadline for distributing 100% of the transit funds from the stimulus package. That’s great news, but it should be accompanied by the sobering reminder that these public transportation systems that get people to work each day largely couldn’t use that money to keep from having to cut service at a time when it’s needed the most.

The FTA has now doled out 881 grants totaling $7.5 billion since the stimulus was signed last year, and LaHood notes that these grants have funded the purchase of nearly 12,000 buses, vans and rail vehicles; construction or renovation of more than 850 transit facilities; and $620 million in preventive maintenance to keep systems running smoothly.

But what about the hundreds of agencies cutting back service, raising fares, or laying off workers — like the terrible story from Atlanta we chronicled last Friday, where 25-30% of all service may be history come June?

Unfortunately, the FTA’s hands were tied with the rules for the grants set by Congress, which meant that almost all of the money had to be used to purchase new equipment or perform maintenance, even if those agencies couldn’t afford to hire or train the new drivers to operate the buses or railcars. We say “most of the money,” because a group of lawmakers were able to successfully include a provision in a separate bill during the summer that made it possible for local transit agencies to spend up to 10% of their transit stimulus money on operations. But in many places like St. Louis, where the deficit was ten times the $4.6 million they could now spend on service, that’s not enough to keep from having to make drastic cuts or lay workers off, even while getting an influx of federal money.

With a full transportation bill likely months away, in the short term we need to urge the Senate to include money in any future jobs bills to help keep transit systems running.

With millions who depend on these systems each day to get to work, making sure that reliable transit service doesn’t disappear will help get them to their jobs quickly and conveniently each day, ensuring that many of them stay employed.

TIGER Grants Offer Critical Support to Communities with Innovative Transportation Projects

Merit-based program an excellent model for the next transportation authorization

The Obama Department of Transportation today broke historic ground in unveiling projects chosen in a first-ever program to award federal dollars on a competitive basis to innovative projects that address economic, environmental and travel issues at once.

The 51 projects announced under the TIGER grant program, funded by $1.5 billion included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), meet a broad array of challenges, including:

Bridge replacements in Oklahoma, Michigan, Wisconsin, Kentucky and Indiana that can support multiple modes of travel;
Port and freight-rail projects to spur economic growth in Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Virginia, Hawaii, Pennsylvania and Ohio;
Modern streetcar construction to support vibrant urban corridors in Tucson, Dallas, Portland and New Orleans and light rail in Detroit;
Innovative highway funding and operations in Texas, North Carolina, Colorado, South Carolina and Arkansas;
Bicycle and pedestrian networks in Philadelphia, Indianapolis, and a complete streets project in Dubuque, IA;
The long-awaited rebirth of New York’s former Penn Station as Moynihan Station.

“These are the kinds of projects that will create good paying jobs, spur local economic development, revive our city centers and create regional integrated transportation solutions,” said John Robert Smith, the co-chair of T4 America and former Mayor of Meridian, Mississippi. “Today’s announcement clearly shows the administration’s commitment to supporting livability initiatives in metropolitan regions, smaller communities and rural areas alike.”

A complete list of recipients can be found on the US DOT press release.

Project applications had to show multiple benefits, with priority give to these criteria: 1) that projects improve the condition of existing facilities and systems, 2) contribute to the economic competitiveness of the U.S. over the medium- to long-term, 3) improve the quality of living and working environments for people, 4) improve energy efficiency, reduce dependence on foreign oil, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and benefit the environment, and 5) improve public safety.

Secretary LaHood spoke from Kansas City, showcasing the city’s Green Impact Zone, an area of high unemployment and concentrated poverty that is being revitalized with green buildings, clean transportation options including public transportation and bicycle and pedestrian projects.

DOT Secretary Ray LaHood noted that the program was extraordinarily sought-after, garnering 1,400 applications totaling nearly $60 billion for the $1.5 billion pot. “The sheer popularity of this ground-breaking approach is testament to how many states and localities are struggling to build innovative projects that simply don’t happen under the pre-existing program,” Mayor Smith said.

“We hope this is a glimpse of what the next transportation authorization could look like,” Smith added. “Congress needs to build on this success and authorize the surface transportation program along similar lines to support innovation and integrated transportation solutions in communities of all sizes.”

FAQ: What are rescissions? Will my state lose transportation money?

Friday, we explained the details surrounding the expiration of the transportation bill on Wednesday night and the one-month extension that was passed. Read that here. Due in part to the failure of a bipartisan plan to shift some revenue to satisfy House budget rules, the states are also losing a total of $8.7 billion in transportation spending, known by the unmistakably Washington-transportation-insider term of a “rescission.”

Here’s our attempt to simplify that issue just a little bit for those who are interested in the policy details. Non-wonks, feel free to skip over this one. Just a fair warning! Click through the jump to read in its entirety. (more…)

Sec. LaHood proposes 18-month extension of current transportation bill

This morning on Capitol Hill, DOT Secretary Ray LaHood proposed an 18-month extension of the current SAFETEA-LU transportation authorization bill. Beyond simply extending the current bill, LaHood indicated that he wants to include some reforms in the 18-month extension — including a focus on metro areas, extensive cost-benefit analysis, and a commitment to “livable communities” — but was short on other specifics.

No word yet on how this will affect the proposed transportation bill outline to be released by Rep. James Oberstar tomorrow morning. Be sure to check back over the next few days for the latest.

From the DOT press room:

“This morning, I went to Capitol Hill to brief members of Congress on the situation with the Highway Trust Fund. I am proposing an immediate 18-month highway reauthorization that will replenish the Highway Trust Fund. If this step is not taken the trust fund will run out of money as soon as late August and states will be in danger of losing the vital transportation funding they need and expect.

“As part of this, I am proposing that we enact critical reforms to help us make better investment decisions with cost-benefit analysis, focus on more investments in metropolitan areas and promote the concept of livability to more closely link home and work. The Administration opposes a gas tax increase during this challenging, recessionary period, which has hit consumers and businesses hard across our country.

“I recognize that there will be concerns raised about this approach. However, with the reality of our fiscal environment and the critical demand to address our infrastructure investments in a smarter, more focused approach, we should not rush legislation. We should work together on a full reauthorization that best meets the demands of the country. The first step is making sure that the Highway Trust Fund is solvent. The next step is addressing our transportation priorities over the long term.”

UPDATE: The Wall Street Journal has a story up covering LaHood’s proposal, and includes a quote from Rep. Oberstar, responding to the idea of an extension:

In a meeting with reporters Wednesday, Mr. Oberstar was adamant that Congress must pass a new law before the current one expires.

“Extension of current law is unacceptable,” Mr. Oberstar said. “Now is the time to move.”

UPDATE 2: Michael Cooper of the New York Times covers the proposed extension, and gets a statement from Jim Berard, spokesman for Rep. Oberstar. “The chairman is not too pleased with the administration’s proposal,” he said.

Transportation Secretary affirms smart principles for US transportation system

National Bike Summit – Day two-8 Originally uploaded by BikePortland.org

DOT Secretary Ray LaHood speaks at the National Bike Summit in Washington, DC

“Livable and Sustainable Communities.”

Those four words might not be at the top of the list of what one would expect to hear from the person in charge of how the federal government spends our tax dollars on all forms of transportation — ports, railroads, highways, interstates, sidewalks, bike lanes and more — but that’s exactly what U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood named as a primary goal for DOT while testifying before a Senate Committee yesterday (ahead of T4 America.)

In his remarks, he made it clear that DOT and the Obama administration see the deep connections between where and how we spend transportation dollars and the quality of life for everyday Americans.

One of the clear issues with our national transportation program since 1991 is that it’s been like a huge ship without a rudder — spending billions each year without any clear goals or vision for exactly what those billions should accomplish for us. Economic development? More travel options for everyone? Making transportation affordable and safe for all Americans?

After talking at length about the many challenges facing America, Secretary LaHood made it clear that DOT will be governed by some very clear principles in the future, including better quality of life as a goal for transportation spending:

With these great challenges it is essential that our transportation policies be framed so that we can meet these demands and at the same time be consistent with the major goals I have established for guiding the actions of the Department of Transportation: economic recovery; safety; and livable and sustainable communities will be the key organizing themes as we in the Department reformulate existing policies and develop new policy directions for the future.

You can download his full remarks from the committee web site here, (.pdf) but continue reading for a few select quotes: (more…)